lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Thu, 3 Dec 2020 22:48:52 +0200
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To:     Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@...dekranz.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, andrew@...n.ch,
        vivien.didelot@...il.com, f.fainelli@...il.com,
        j.vosburgh@...il.com, vfalico@...il.com, andy@...yhouse.net,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 2/4] net: dsa: Link aggregation support

On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 10:13:54AM +0100, Tobias Waldekranz wrote:
> +static int dsa_slave_check_lag_upper(struct net_device *dev)
> +{
> +	struct dsa_port *dp = dsa_slave_to_port(dev);
> +	struct dsa_switch_tree *dst = dp->ds->dst;
> +
> +	if (!dsa_lag_offloading(dst))
> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> +
> +	if (dsa_lag_by_dev(dst, dev))
> +		return NOTIFY_OK;
> +
> +	if (!dsa_lag_available(dst))
> +		return notifier_from_errno(-EBUSY);

If for any reason there are no LAGs available in hardware, I think this
should still return NOTIFY_OK and we should not reject it, just not
offload it.

Which is to say that I basically don't understand the point of the
PRECHANGEUPPER checks.

> +
> +	return NOTIFY_OK;
> +}

Powered by blists - more mailing lists